[QGIS-Developer] Two proposals -- moratorium on LLM use, and requiring a "proof of life" for contributors

Thu Sep 24 01:08:34 PDT 2026

Hi Nyall

On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 8:54 AM Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Sept 2026 at 19:49, Tim Sutton <tim at kartoza.com> wrote:
>
> > If you don't mind would you roll back the template change long enough
> for use to lay down the policy through a QEP and then have at it in terms
> of putting whatever tooling you need to reject LLM originated requests?
>
> Done
>
> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67527
> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/387

Thank you so much.

>
>
> I do ask that the PSC be ready to step in with their override power if
> the discussion on the QEP is derailed or cannot reach a satisfactory
> conclusion.
>

Phasers locked and loaded :-)

Regards

Tim

>
> Nyall
>
>
>
> >
> > I am happy to jump in to help with QEP writing etc. if needed, just let
> me know. Personally speaking, I know you and Even have expended a lot of
> mental energy on LLM related discussions and I would really love to see us
> provide an environment where it is simply a non-issue,we have clear
> policies and you can get on with the stuff you (hopefully) love - building
> the greatest GIS on planet earth!
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> > (No LLM was used to compose this email)
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 11:19 PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer <
> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, I've submitted https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67509 now. Can
> someone please approve and merge this?
> >>
> >> Then (someone motivated) can kick-start the follow up discussion and
> argue their case that LLM use *should* be allowed.
> >>
> >> Nyall
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 22 Sept 2026 at 01:22, David Signer <david at opengis.ch> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi everyone
> >>>
> >>> I think #1 to get time until we have a good solution for #2 won't
> hurt. The QGIS project worked well before AI. I kind of miss the big
> argument for why we need to use AI for QGIS immediately. I am not against
> using new technology, but I think we risk nothing by proceeding with a
> careful deliberation. Regarding #2 I am not a big fan of validating a new
> contributor's credibility through financial donations, but with #1 we would
> have time to find a good solution there.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks and cheers
> >>> Dave
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2026 at 8:28 PM Célia Buira via QGIS-Developer <
> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> What about implementing #2 proof of life first, see the effect of
> this new policy on the github tracker, and only then implementing #1 if
> it's still needed ?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> About #2 I like the idea of the proof of life however requiring a
> financial contribution is rubbing me the wrong way. Contributing
> efficiently to the code of QGIS already required access to multiple
> thousands of dollars hardware, often you come to qgis after higher degrees
> of education which also adds inequality barriers. (I remember when I
> started to contribute to qgis it would take a whole night to do a clean
> build of qgis on my laptop at the time)
> >>>>
> >>>> I think we should go for something simpler as in require new
> contributor to screencast the end result of their PR and made them open the
> help > about this way we can also check they compiled with the last Sha
> commit of the PR.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> And for #1 My position is very much `wait and see`, I think it's too
> early to tell where the balance between social benefits and social costs of
> these tools will land in the end. And it would be too bad to remove a tool
> that could genuinely be useful in the future. In the last discussion
> Stefanos mentioned to allow contributor to use LLM once a certain threshold
> of PR is reached I think we should explore this too before straight up ban
> LLM
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> And overall it sadden me that we collectively spent 3 decades writing
> free software, free tutorials etc... Effectively creating commons. And LLM
> companies took that from us, and make us pay twice. A first time at
> individual level to access this technology, and a second time by putting
> pressure on people and infrastructure.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would like to float another ideas around even if it would be hard
> to enforce in practice.
> >>>> *Force AI companies to give back*.
> >>>> Want to use Claude code? Sure but anthropic have to become a
> sustaining member of QGIS.org first
> >>>> Want to use codex, gemini? Then openAi and Google have to contribute
> to the project financially and I'm talking geniully multiple thousands
> dollars contributions.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> In other words we should enter collective bargaining between open
> source communities and AI companies with in mind the "polluter pays
> principle"
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Célia
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Le mer. 16 sept. 2026 à 05:44, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer <
> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a écrit :
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Hi list,
> >>>> >
> >>>> > It's quite clear that there's considerable hurt and disappointment
> >>>> > within the QGIS developer community right now, and for very
> >>>> > understandable reasons.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I've been giving this a lot of thought over the last few days, and
> >>>> > would like to propose two actions we could take that I think would
> >>>> > make a positive difference to our community.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > #1. Place an immediate, total moratorium on all forms of LLM based
> >>>> > contributions.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > We've tried gentle policies regarding this up till now, but clearly
> >>>> > that's not helping. So I would like to propose a complete and total
> >>>> > moratorium on any form of contribution assisted in any way (beyond
> as
> >>>> > a replacement for a simple web search*).
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I think we should introduce a firm policy ASAP as a step toward
> >>>> > repairing our community, and only after this could we start
> >>>> > discussions about what form of LLM contribution may be acceptable.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I.e. RIGHT NOW we default to a safe "NO AI" policy, and potentially
> >>>> > later loosen this, rather than having a loose policy right now that
> >>>> > maybe we'll correct in future.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > #2. Require a "proof of life" from all new contributors
> >>>> >
> >>>> > The above policy only really applies to existing contributors who we
> >>>> > know and trust. Any policy we introduce will just be totally ignored
> >>>> > or lied about by bots or karma farming AI sloppers. I've been
> >>>> > wondering how to handle this. I've been thinking some form of "proof
> >>>> > that you are a human and who you actually are" could be required, as
> >>>> > some kind of document submitted to PSC for private/secure storage.
> But
> >>>> > realistically, that's impossible in 2026, as any form of ID document
> >>>> > could be forged in a few seconds, and it's clearly not possible for
> >>>> > QGIS.org to police.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > So I'd propose that new contributors must FIRST make a financial
> >>>> > donation to the QGIS project, before any contributions from that
> >>>> > person are accepted in any form. This could be a small amount, just
> >>>> > enough to deter the karma farmers who don't actually care about the
> >>>> > project and what they're contributing. And any amount would be
> >>>> > sufficient to block the bots.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > (Another solution could be to require a face-to-face, in person
> >>>> > meeting with a contributor before they can submit changes)
> >>>> >
> >>>> > What do you all think? I believe we need to act immediately on #1.
> (I
> >>>> > realise #2 may be more tricky and/or controversial)
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Nyall
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > * because the web is broken in 2026. "simple" web searches don't
> work anymore.
> >>>> > _______________________________________________
> >>>> > QGIS-Developer mailing list
> >>>> > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>> > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> >>>> > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> QGIS-Developer mailing list
> >>>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> QGIS-Developer mailing list
> >> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
> >> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Tim Sutton
> > Kartoza Cofounder
> > Tim is a member of the QGIS Project Steering Committee
> >
> > E : tim at kartoza.com          W : kartoza.com
> >
> >
> >
> > This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for
> the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
> > have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying
> > of the contents is prohibited.
>

-- 

Tim Sutton

*Kartoza Cofounder*Tim is a member of the QGIS Project Steering Committee

*E *: tim at kartoza.com          *W* : kartoza.com

*This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for
the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you *
*have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete it from your system. Unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying*
*of the contents is prohibited.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20260924/325a385e/attachment-0001.htm>